Do they fight babies too?
Excellent post on the iniquities of bull-fighting here:
I concentrate, therefore, on Fiske-Harrison’s dismissal of the idea that animals could have rights. He bases this on the argument that having rights must entail having duties. But this is true only on some accounts of what rights are, and not on others. If rights are based on the fundamental interests of the being that has them, then animals can have rights, because they have interests. It is also worth noting one of the consequences of insisting that only a responsible agent - that is, one capable of having and fulfilling duties - can have rights: this is that infants and very young children would have no rights, and neither would people suffering from senile dementia. It also doesn’t follow from thinking animals have rights that we are duty bound to make interventions of an impossible kind into the interactions between other species. We can only do what we can do.
One thing we can certainly do is register how very many sources of aesthetic gratification there are in the world that do not involve tormenting animals.
Neither a newborn human nor a bull possess what we recognise as full logical faculties; yet we prize one and torture the other for sport. How does that make sense?